2. Contact Info

3. Dealer Selection

A little over a year ago, I was returning home on a walk when I noticed a long, squiggly set of skidmarks on a four-lane surface street near my house that culminated in a mangled tree trunk. From following the path of the tires, it was clear the front-left quarter of the car had taken the brunt of the immovable pine. The next day, driving down the same stretch of road, I slowed down to trace the skids and imagine my car on this harrowing course. I stopped imagining when I saw bouquets set around the base of the tree. Whoever was at the wheel had died.

Around this time, testing director Kim Reynolds began working on a story — “The 25% Solution” — for our May 2013 issue, an enlightening piece that documented a Volvo XC60 acing the IIHS’ then-new small overlap frontal crash test (SOL), which mimics the driver-side front 25 percent of a vehicle striking another car, a pole, or yes, a tree by ramming it against a 5-foot-tall rigid barrier at 40 mph. Per IIHS data, of the roughly 10,000 fatalities that stemmed from frontal crashes in 2012, about 25 percent (there’s that number again) were the result of this small overlap phenomenon. (Data by Prasad Engineering at a January 2014 SAE meeting suggests that number is closer to 8 percent.) As Kim detailed: “A 25-percent overlap crash misses both frame rails. A tree trunk, for instance, can butter-knife through the superficial sheetmetal. It’s the sort of horror show they used to scare the hell out of you with in Driver’s Ed.”

It scared me. As the father of two, I began paying close attention to which vehicles were receiving the IIHS’ Top Safety Pick+ score, with the “+” signaling at least an Acceptable rating in the SOL. After all, I want my kids to be safe, and I want to be around to see them grow up. That’s why, on a winter trip to Oregon, I borrowed a pair of Recaro child seats and had a set of Dunlop Winter Maxx tires installed on a loaner Subaru. But that’s just me. It’s interesting that for our recent compact car Big Test, a majority of our editors voted the Kia Forte ahead of the Honda Civic, despite the Forte being “the worst performer for both restraints and structure of all of the small cars evaluated,” according to IIHS, and the Civic earning “good ratings for restraints and kinematics and structure.” Safety is paramount to some, but not all.

Back to the Civic. Knowing that its oft-criticized 2012 model wouldn’t have passed the SOL, Honda made myriad structural enhancements to the ’13, including extending the front bumper beam — it comes longer outboard of the front side frame — and changing the construction so the upper front structure connects directly to the bumper’s outer edge, giving the Civic “early engagement” with the crash partner, to absorb energy quickly. Similar revisions made 2014 Mazda CX-5s built after October 2013 improve from a Marginal to Good score. Per Chuck Thomas, chief safety engineer at Honda: “Hondas aren’t designed to do well in these tests; they’re designed to be safe. The tests are a reflection of that design.” Subaru, whose Forester was the first small SUV to sail through the SOL, practices a similar approach. According to a brand spokesperson in Japan, “‘Enjoyment and Peace of Mind’ are core brand values of Subaru, and we regard ‘Safety Performance’ as the most important aspect of the car since it is directly connected to peace of mind.”

I don’t ever plan to hit a tree at 40 mph.

But stuff happens, often in the blink of an eye. I’d rather pay heed to the SOL test than suffer the consequences and be relegated to the other SOL.